Cause of Action in Negligence

725 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Applying negligence principles

The tort is evident due to the negligence of Silverline Construction ltd. The following evidence can be used by the plaintiff. Below I have stated my evidence in accordance to Emma’s case. The plaintiff is due a form of repayment/compensation as stated within the case, due to the negligence presented by Silverline construction ltd. Emma suffered serious facial injuries and concussion and could not carry out her work for 6 months. The case of Lord Atkin in Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC562 ‘’you must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour. Who, then, in law is my neighbour?’’ this effectively means that Silverline construction ltd. should have foreseen the possibility of there being a failure in the buildings construction taking into consideration the residence within the parameter of the site. I have simply stated the basis that Emma is owed a duty of care due to their negligence. The following case established in conjunction that clearly assess whether or not the plaintiff is owed a duty is shown in the case of Caparo Industries Plc. v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605 developing the fundamental outline that is presented from the neighbours principle, a three stage test was created to further assess the eligibility of a claim. In some respects it was foreseeable that if the building collapsed the chances of the building causing damage to property or causing injury to be high, however it wasn’t taken into consideration the structural integrity of the building, causing it to collapse. The second stage looks for the physical closeness within the two parties, this extends from the neighbour principle further assessing the right to a claim. The building coll... ... middle of paper ... .../cases/EWHC/Exch/1856/J65.html&query=Blyth+and+v.+and+Birmingham+and+Waterworks&method=boolean Last accessed: 11th November 2013. Consumer Build. (N/A). Construction phase. Available: http://www.consumerbuild.org.nz/publish/phase/buildingphase-final.php. Last accessed 9th November 2013. Lord Atkin. (1932). Negligence – duty of care. Available: http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/Duty-of-care.php. Last accessed 8th November 2013. Negligence Duty of care Cases. (2003). Available: http://www.lawteacher.net/tort-law/cases/negligence-duty-cases.php. Last accessed 8th November 2013. Neighbour principle. (2003). Available: http://www.lawteacher.net/tort-law/essays/neighbour-principle.php. Last accessed 8th November 2013. Tort - Caparo v Dickman. (2003). Available: http://www.lawteacher.net/tort-law/essays/tort-caparo-v-dickman.php. Last accessed 8th November 2013.

Show More
Related

  • flegg

    965 Words  | 2 Pages

    The importance of social context in Land Law and the reforms which have occurred as a result cannot be ignored or their significance understated. In particular is the impact of the shift in the twentieth century to ‘emergence of a property owning, particularly a real-property-mortgaged-to-a-building-society-owning-democracy’. Such growth could hardly have been anticipated when the LPA 1925 was drafted and subsequently became statute. As a consequence of this growth the doctrine of the resulting trust and to a greater extent, the constructive trust became a robust mechanism by which non legal owners could establish beneficial interests in the home. Swadling comments on the ‘complete change in attitude’ between the emphasis on security of ownership of the home in Boland and the free marketability of land which we see in Flegg. He states ‘one wonders what has happened to the demands of social justice which justified their Lordships decision in 1980 (in Boland) over such a brief passage of time’. Did the House of Lords fail to resolve the very practical issue with which they were presented that had evolved over the passage of social change since the drafting of the 1925 legislation?

    Read More

  • Case Study of the 4 D's of Negligence

    517 Words  | 2 Pages

    A dentist fits several children with braces. The children are regular patients of the dentist. The results for some of the patients turn out to be unacceptable and damaging. There are children who have developed gum infections due to improperly tightened braces. Some mistakenly had their permanent teeth removed, while others have misaligned bites. A local attorney becomes aware of these incidences, looks further into it, and realizes the dentist has not been properly trained and holds no legal license to practice dentistry or orthodontics. The attorney decides to act on behalf of the displeased patients and files a class action lawsuit. The attorney plans to prove the dentist negligent and guilty of dental malpractice by providing proof using the four D’s of negligence. The four D’s of negligence are duty, dereliction, direct cause and damages.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Negligence

    887 Words  | 2 Pages

    A series of events unfolded when George, running late for class, parked his car on a steep section on Arbutus drive and failed to remember to set the parking brake. The outcome of not remembering to set the parking brake caused many issues resulting in scrapping a Prius, breaking through fencing, people on the train sustaining injuries, and finally a truck that jack-knifed and caused a 42-car pileup. Could the parties that were injured, from George’s actions, be recovered from under the negligence theory? To understand if George is negligent, it is best to look at the legal issue, the required elements of negligence, the definition and explanation of each element of the case, and finally to draw a conclusion to determine if George is negligent.

    Read More

  • Assignment To George Jamerson's Case

    1176 Words  | 3 Pages

    Their testimony has shown that my client has suffered extensive physical and mental injuries as a result of this accident. The auto accident expert also presented testimony which supports the plaintiff’s claim that had Mr. Jamerson not been illegally driving a commercial tractor in the far left lane on the Howard Franklin Bridge, the accident could have been avoided, or at least made a much smaller impact than the accident my client was involved in. The various testimony presented by the experts has shown that my client is in no way at fault for her injuries, and that she has and will continue to suffer permanent injury as a result of both defendant’s

    Read More

  • tort of negligent investigation

    1025 Words  | 3 Pages

    As police officers own right to carry out an investigation on the suspect, public arise concerning on negligent investigation. In the Hill v. Hamiton-Wentworth case, Mr. Hill was accused robbery and then was proved innocent. Mr. Hill filled a lawsuit against police officers on the tort of negligent investigation, and the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed Hill’s appeal. Moreover, a majority of the court recognizes there is a tort of negligent investigation in Canada, but Mr. Hill was investigated under code of care and no tort of negligent investigation during his investigation. While the argument of minority believes the tort of negligent investigation should be recognized in Canada, and the police had been negligent, the argument of minority is more compelling than majority.

    Read More

  • Negligence In The Film A Civil Action

    610 Words  | 2 Pages

    The movie “A Civil Action” released on January 8, 1999 provides viewers with an extraordinary story of the nightmare that occurred in Woburn Massachusetts in the late 1970’s. The people of this small town at the time had no idea what was going on until there were various cases of Leukemia in small children that ultimately resulted in the early passing of them. The people eventually had gone to find out that the drinking water in this small town was contaminated and there were many women that stepped in to get answers. This movie is a tremendously jaw dropping, eye opening account of a heartbreaking true story incident. There are various elements of negligence in this movie including, duty, legal cause, proximate cause and damages.

    Read More

  • Occupiers Liability Act 1957

    704 Words  | 2 Pages

    Under the 1957 Act, if the occupier gives a visitor sufficient warning of a danger and hence the visitor will be safe, the occupier will not be responsible for any damaged suffered by the visitor as the result of that danger. In Rae v Mars (1990), the claimant was a surveyor visiting a factory, which was empty. Near the entrance was a deep pit and hence he fell into it before he switches on his torch and watch it. There was a dispute about that he had been warned about the

    Read More

  • Case Notes for Corr v IBC

    1511 Words  | 4 Pages

    The plaintiff, Mr Thomas Corr was an engineer employed by IBC vehicles Limited. Thomas who was 31 years of age at the time was working on a machine, when it threw a metal plate towards him without warning. It hit the right side of his head cutting off some of his ear. Due to the injury, Mr Corr had surgery on his right ear in order to try and fix it. He remained disfigured, suffered persistently from unsteadiness, mild tinnitus and severe headaches and had difficulty sleeping. He suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder due to this accident. Mr Corr became depressed following this accident and over time his depression got worse. He attempted to commit suicide on two occasions, the first time he took and overdose of drugs and was admitted to hospital. The second time he succeeded in taking his own life by jumping from a multi-storey car park.

    Read More

  • State of Good Faith in English Contract Law

    2595 Words  | 6 Pages

    The law of contract in many legal systems requires that parties should act in good faith. English law refuses to impose such a general doctrine of good faith in the field of contract law. However, despite not recognizing the principle, English contract law is still influenced by notions of good faith. As Lord Bingham affirmed, the law has developed numerous piecemeal solutions in response to problems of unfairness. This essay will seek to examine the current and future state of good faith in English contract law.

    Read More

  • Negligence Case Study

    935 Words  | 2 Pages

    Negligence, as defined in Pearson’s Business Law in Canada, is an unintentional careless act or omission that causes injury to another. Negligence consists of four parts, of which the plaintiff has to prove to be able to have a successful lawsuit and potentially obtain compensation. First there is a duty of care: Who is one responsible for? Secondly there is breach of standard of care: What did the defendant do that was careless? Thirdly there is causation: Did the alleged careless act actually cause the harm? Fourthly there is damage: Did the plaintiff suffer a compensable type of harm as a result of the alleged negligent act? Therefore, the cause of action for Helen Happy’s lawsuit will be negligence, and she will be suing the warden of the Peace River Correctional Centre, attributable to vicarious liability. As well as, there will be a partial defense (shared blame) between the warden and the two employees, Ike Inkster and Melvin Melrose; whom where driving the standard Correction’s van.

    Read More

  • Mini Trial Case Study

    732 Words  | 2 Pages

    Disputes are almost unavoidable between people when there are disagreements or misunderstandings. In the construction industry, contractual relationships could lead to dispute. To resolve disputes, construction disputes are most likely encouraged to use Alternative Dispute Resolutions such as arbitration, mediation, and mini-trials to resolve their disputes faster and keep the dispute confidential and at lower cost (Ray, 2000). The construction case presented in this paper first resorted to negotiation; however, it could not give the parties a resolution which led to a mini-trial.

    Read More

  • Pure Economic Loss Case Study

    1626 Words  | 4 Pages

    What occurred in this case was that in a new build factory there had been inoperative flooring set and the claimants in this case lost money due to the flooring having to be reset again. In this case the claimants were in contract with the builders who laid the floor but decided not to sue them but to sue the sub contractors for their negligence because they were present when the builders and claimants were at meetings when discussing the flooring. Similarly, to the case Anns v Merton London Borough Council [1978] the court allowed the claimants to sue the defendants for their financial

    Read More

  • Williams V Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd

    509 Words  | 2 Pages

    The case of Williams v Roffey Bros. & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1991] 1 QB 1 is one of legal significance within the area of consideration. For an agreement to be legally enforceable every contract must be supported by valid consideration, which is a device used by the courts to limit the numbers of promises they can be expected to referee over if/when the parties disagree. In this case, the plaintiff, Mr Lester Williams, was a carpenter employed by the defendants, Roffey Bros., a contractor for Shepherds Bush Housing Association. During the project, Williams ran into financial difficulties because the original sum agreed (£20,000 to refurbish 27 London flats) was not enough for the work to be completed. To avoid being penalised under a late penalty clause in the main contract, the defendants agreed to pay a further £575 per flat for on time completion. The defendants failed to make sufficient payment (£1,500 for eight flats) and so Williams ceased work.

    Read More

  • The Tort of Negligence

    1121 Words  | 3 Pages

    did owe a duty of care to Mrs. Donoghue, in that it was up to them to...

    Read More

  • Occupiers' Liability from the Common Law

    1692 Words  | 4 Pages

    The first point to note when analysing occupiers’ liability is that originally it was separate to the general principles of negligence which were outlined in Donoghue v Stevenson .The reason for this “pigeon hole approach” was that the key decision of occupiers’ liability, Indermaur v Dames was decided sixty six years prior to the landmark decision of Donoghue v Stevenson . McMahon and Binchy state the reason why it was not engulfed into general negligence, was because it “… had become too firmly entrenched by 1932 … to be swamped by another judicial cross-current” Following on from Indermaur v Dames the courts developed four distinct categories of entrant which I will now examine in turn.

    Read More

More about Cause of Action in Negligence

Open Document